Pork Industry stops raw imports

The Pork Industry Board has managed to get biosecurity clearance for raw pork revoked until the appeal in the Supreme Court is determined:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC 36/2013
[2013] NZSC 58

BETWEEN THE NEW ZEALAND PORK INDUSTRY BOARD
Appellant
AND THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES
First Respondent
AND THE CHIEF TECHNICAL OFFICER AND BIOSECURITY NEW ZEALAND
Second Respondents

[...]

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The order made on 31 May 2013 is revoked and in its place there is an order as follows:

The Ministry for Primary Industries, and any inspector acting on its behalf, is restrained from granting biosecurity clearances under ss 26–28 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 for any consumer ready cuts of raw pork product that may now be imported as a result of the Director-General’s decision to issue the following new import health standards:

• Import Health Standard for Pig Meat and Pig Meat Products for Human Consumption from the European Union, MEAPORIC.EU dated 18 March 2011 (with the exception of products from Sweden and Finland).

• Import Health Standard for Pig Meat and Pig Meat Products for Human Consumption from the Sonora State of Mexico, MEAPORIC.MEX dated 18 March 2011.
• Import Health Standard for Pig Meat and Pig Meat Products for Human Consumption from Canada and/or the United States of America, MEAPORIC.NAM dated 18 March 2011.

This order remains in force pending determination of the present appeal or further order of the Court.

The board has been fighting the imports on the grounds that the risk of importing disease which could threaten locally raised pigs is too great.

“Australian” not racist slur – court

An English court has found it’s not racist to call a Kiwi Australian.

Petra Mills, 31, was witnessed by police officers calling her neighbour Chelsea O’Reilly – a British/New Zealand national – a ‘stupid fat Australian’ during a drunken tirade at her former home in Macclesfield.

Macclesfield magistrates found her guilty of racially aggravated public disorder and assaulting a police officer in November last year.

Ms O’Reilly claimed that Czech-born Ms Mills had used the term ‘Australian’ offensively as she knew she was from neighbouring New Zealand.

But Chester Crown Court overturned the public disorder charge after ruling the use of the word ‘Australian’ could not be considered racist.. . .

I understand why Australian couldn’t be considered racist, but why was the injured party more concerned about the slur on her nationality than her intelligence and appearance?

No remorse

Lucy Lawless has declared her sentence for boarding a drilling ship a total victory.

She shows no remorse.

Perhaps the $650 fine and 120 hours community service, which is a pretty light sentence, just reinforces her apparent conviction that doing wrong is justified if you think you’re Regard regardless of the risks and costs to others.

Water wrongs

At 10 this morning the High Court will hear the Maori Council’s pleas for an injunction against the government’s plans to sell a minority share in Mighty River Power.

Is  this motivated by:

A) a principled belief that Maori own water.

B) politics.

C) the hope of more money for Maori.

D) the certainty of more money for lawyers.

E) ?

Shanghai Pengxin has nous to run farms – court

The Court of Appeal is satisfied that Shanghai Pengxin has the nous to run what were the Crafar farms.

The Court of Appeal has turned down a bid by merchant banker Michael Fay and two Maori trusts to stop the sale of 16 Central North Island farms, saying it was satisfied with the general business acumen and experience of the Chinese buyer.

Judges Mark O’Regan, Terence Arnold and Douglas White dismissed the judicial review, saying Jiang Zhaobai’s ability to bring himself from humble beginnings to become “a person of some stature in the Chinese commercial world,” would satisfy the minister making the decision in approving the sale of the Crafar family farms.

“The information provided to the ministers was sufficient to enable them to determine that he and the other controlling individuals had generic business skills and acumen relevant to the Crafar farms investment,” Judge Arnold said in delivering the judgment.

“We see nothing in the language, taken in context, to indicate that Parliament had in mind that an investor must have any particular combination of the requisite skills and experience,” the judgment said.

Agri-business experience was only one factor which needed to be taken into consideration.

 ”While apparently important, it did not lead to a conclusion that was insupportable or unreasonable in the absence of that experience.”

The judges said even if the ministers erred in accepting Pengxin’s agribusiness investments, “it is unlikely that we would have exercised our discretion to grant a remedy.”

That’s because the ministers decided the foreign investment would have a substantial benefit to New Zealand, the deal hasn’t been settled and creditors are still waiting on repayments, and that the farms are being operated by the receiver in a manner than presumably “involves minimal further investment.”

Those who oppose the purchase forget about the creditors who are owed millions of dollars. The higher the purchase price, the more the creditors will recover.

I don’t think the state should be farming but Landcorp farms are generally well managed. Their experience and Shanghai Pengxin’s money should be good for the farms and the stringent conditions imposed by the Overseas Investment Office will result in benefits for the country too.

Court via Skype

Courts Minister Chester Borrows has announced Oamaru will be the first place in New Zealand to trail Skype in Family Court hearings.

Oamaru has been without a permanent courthouse since November when the building was deemed an earthquake risk, and Mr  Borrows said while temporary alternative locations were being  sought, audio visual technology would be trialled with a sitting Family Court judge on August 14.   

Existing audio visual platforms, such as Skype, were reliable and efficient enough for use in court, he said, adding that the idea also had backing from legal professionals in the town.   

 Following the trial run, a larger six-month trial, which would take place in Family Court proceedings from Oamaru south, would occur in September, Mr Borrows said.

This will save time and money for lawyers and their clients.

Skype works well for interviews and meetings, there’s no reason it shouldn’t work as well for court.

Directors and investors beware

It will be cold comfort to the people who lost fortunes in Lombard Finance that Sir Douglas Graham also lost a large amount – a couple of million dollars.

The sentence of fines and community service handed down to him and other directors won’t help those who lost money either.

But it is a warning to other directors of their responsibilities and to investors that there’s a correlation between risk and return, no matter who’s running the company.

Court of new beginnings reduces reoffending by 60%

Statistic of the day:

Mr Coster says 80% of daylight anti-social behaviour in the city is caused by just 30 people.

But the Special Circumstances Court, also known as the Court of New Beginnings, was established in 2010 its programme to rehabilitate and support homeless people caught in a cycle of low-level offending, has resulted in 60% reduction in reoffending.

That’s good for them and good for society.

Desperation or stupidity?

Is this desperation or stupidity?

A Queenstown mother has admitted making calls claiming to be a sexual health worker in a bid to damage the reputation of a teenage girl who was a rival to her daughter as both had applied to study at two Dunedin high schools. 

The woman has interim name suppression, which isn’t usually very effective in small towns where the grapevine is so efficient. But this is a case when I think suppression is justified, not for the defendent’s sake but that of her daughter.

People taking extreme steps to ensure their children get into a school didn’t used to be a problem in the provinces.

Increased zoning and concern over standards at some state schools could change that and influence property values. But hopefully it won’t prompt any more of the strange behaviour which has led to this court case.

Speaker refers Leigh case to Privileges Committee

Speaker Lockwood Smith has referred the Erin Leigh case to the Privileges Committee.

The Supreme court ruled that advice from officials to ministers was not covered by absolute privilege, Dr Smith said the issue raised serious matters which he would refer to the privileges committee for consideration.

The court ruling allowed Ms Leigh to sue for defamation. That doesn’t mean she was defamed but it leaves her free to take a case but unfortunately the cost of doing that has stopped her taking the matter any further.

I hope the Privileges Committee not only looks at the implications of the ruling but at the behaviour of the MPs and state servants which prompted the case.

A report on the court decision is here.

Kiwiblog has a Q&A from Ms Leigh.

Duncan Garner says she deserves an apology, and a payout to not only cover costs, but  to reflect damages.

Sex by judicial decree no joke

The story of a woman successfully suing her ex-husband because his libido was too low for her liking will probably be treated as a joke.

It’s not funny when you go beyond the headline:

But the strains of work and illness prevented Jean-Louis from fulfilling his matrimonial duties, his advocate pleaded.

Announcing her decision the judge quoted the French civil and penal code, which requires both parties in a marriage to respect ‘lifelong community’ requiring them by law to have sexual relations.

Sex by judicial decree isn’t funny.

It probably would be even less likely to be regarded as amusing  if it was the man who complained about the woman but it’s no more a joke because it was the husband’s low libido which prompted the case rather than the wife’s.

Non-consensual sex is abuse regardless of who’s demanding and who’s reluctant.

A difference in libido would cause problems in a relationship but they would be best sorted out by counselling rather than a court.

Famous for being not well known

When someone whispered, via email, who the celebrity seeking name suppression after his arrest for disorderly behaviour was I recognised the name but couldn’t place it.

I’m in good company. The judge who heard an application for continued suppression said he didn’t know who the bloke was either.

Had the accused fronted up and apologised it would all have blown over by now.

Instead of which he’s become famous for not being well known, ensured his case gets on-gong going publicity and given further impetus to the need for changes to the law on name suppression.

Where’s Whaleoil?

A TV3 news story says Whaleoil blogger Cameron Slater is mocking another suppresion order.

Clicking on both Whaleoil and Gotcha led to an error message.

Is that just a conincidence?

Victim impact report censored

Gil Elliot, the father of Sophie who was murdered by Clayton Weatherston, wants changes to the law to allow greater freedom of expression for people giving victim impact statements.

The statement he delivered to the court before Clayotn Weatherston was sentenced was heavily censored and he is justifiably angry about that.

There is something wrong with a justice system which allows an accused person to besmirch his victim’s reputation but censors her father’s victim impact statement.

Courting trouble

Bloggers beware: the Crown Law Office is reviewing internet publication after recent cases raised questions over contempt of court and suppression order breaches.

It’s nearly 30 years since I studied media law at journalism school. We weren’t using computers and had never heard of the internet so what we learned applied to print and broadcast media.

But I’ve always blogged on the theory that the laws which applied then still apply now whether they’re published in old media or new.

Comment which might influence a case before it’s concluded, publishing information that’s been suppressed or indentifying – explicitly or not – someone who has name suppression are all courting trouble.

Contempt of court has always been a serious charge and I don’t think the medium in which the offending comments were published would make a difference.

Stadium gets tick, opponents get bill

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against the Dunedin City Council’s funding of the Forsyth Barr Stadium. Stop the Stadium which brought the action will have to pay up to $17,000 for costs.

That’s how it should be.

Ratepayers will have spent a lot more on the council’s defence of the action and if the opponents didn’t pay court costs the taxpayer would have to.

Obviously obvious #2

A juror wrote to a judge and the  general manager of  high courts calling for better screening of English comprehenion in potential jurors after serving on a jury, most members of which didn’t speak English as a first language.

Some people speak and understand English better as a second language than others do as a first so not being a native English speaker should not rule people out of jury duty altogether.

But whether English is your first language or not, a good grasp of the language and listening comprehension skills ought to be a pre-requisite for jurors.

Blogs subject to same legal restraints as other media

Media law was an important part of Canterbury University’s  journalism course and we were fortunate to have one of New Zealand’s top specialists, Professor John Burrows, lecturing us.

The dangers of defamation, contempt of court and prejudicing a trial were repeated many times, with precautionary tales of journalists who had crossed the line to reinforce the seriousness of breaching the law. 

Those lessons have helped me resist any temptation I might have had to write posts on trials while they are under way.

Blogging may be a much more informal method of communicationt than other media, but it is subject to similar legal constraints.

The ODT reports on the issue and quotes Otago University law professor, Mark Henaghan:

“If it [blogging] is outside the law it would be ridiculous.”It would be a good idea if the solicitor-general brought contempt proceedings, as it would be a test case, he said.

“We’ve pussyfooted around blogging too much – it is part of communication.”Any interference with court proceedings was contempt of court.

Whether comments were made in blogs or yelling it out in court, it was still contempt.

“It’s a serious matter,” Prof Henaghan said.

Bloggers don’t have the safety net of sub editors to save us from ourselves and it’s not just what we post but what people may say in comments which could fall foul of the law.

For these reasons I’ll stick with my policy of playing safe.  I’m rarely tempted to post on criminal matters but if I am I’ll be waiting until after the case has been concluded.

Publication part of punishment

Publication of some offenders’ photos could be a more powerful deterrent than a sentence according to Distirct Court Judge Stephen O’Driscoll.

He was ruling on an application by the ODT to publish a photo of a man who admitted downloading images showing sexual exploitation of children.

Granting the application, Judge O’Driscoll said the basic principle of an open court meant the media, which had an obligation to be fair and balanced, was “the eyes and ears of the public” and always entitled to be in court.

… Judge O’Driscoll said the publication of the defendant’s name and photograph could be a powerful deterrent to both those already involved in such offending and those considering it.

The defendent’s counsel opposed the application for lifting name suppression noting the impact on the defendent’s wife and elderly mother. But the judge said it was a sad consequence of offending that there were always innocent family members who suffered.

And of course the innocent children who are exploited by pornographers.